In general conformity is studied in a probability learning paradigm that provides the subjects with the stimulus predictions of other individuals before they make their own predictions. Running subjects in individual booths and using lights to indicate the predictions of other decision makers has enabled a study of both decision and reaction latencies as a function of several independent variables (i.e., the proportion of correct predictions by the subject or by the other individuals, the sequential outcomes of preceding predictions, stimulus probability). Results have been interpreted with a continuous stimulus-expectancy theory. Extending the social-prediction paradigm to a group setting whereby subjects verbalize their predictions after hearing the predictions of other individuals (i.e., confederates of the experimenter posing as subjects) has obviated the measurement of response latencies, but has enabled the manipulation of social variables with applied relevance. For example, the seating distance between decision makers was varied systematically, and amount of conformity was observed to be an inverse function of interactive proximity. Furthermore, a main effect of sex-role orientation has been found, with stereotypic females conforming significantly more often than androgynous females, stereotypic males, and androgynous males. Research is currently underway to follow up these provocative observations tht show frequency of decision agreement to be affected by interactive distance and sex-role orientation.